SPECIAL REPORT - Why Greece needs Costas Karamanlis to rise to the occasion once more!

We kick off a new news year at a time when PASOK, which now calls itself SYRIZA, begins governing Greece for the seventh time, while the refugee crisis is at its height and austerity has without a doubt impoverished one third of the Greek population. In all this chaos, there is no opposition because the conservatives -who lost to the SYRIZA party on September 20th- are seeking to settle scores. Why should we care? Well, the developments in ND do not just affect the party voters and officers, but all of political life as we know it because the role of the main opposition is crucial for democracy, since it monitors the government. Without a doubt, Greece faces some daunting challenges in the months to come, which will require all of our attention and support, and in all this uncertainty there is one thing missing, someone to give this nation some hope. A natural born leader.

Signed
Marina Spanos

Some may be scratching their heads especially after Alexis Tsipras' grand win -for the second time- a couple of days ago, but we all know that he is not a natural born leader. The reasons are clear. Groups like SYRIZA employ radical-sounding or Marxist phraseology, and only do so to cover for right-wing policies and a defense of the capitalist system. In other words, he is nothing more than a pseudo version of the late Andreas Papandreou and the PASOK party. Tsipras shot to fame when the SYRIZA party, which in all reality was nothing more than a desperate alliance of leftist factions, finished second to the conservative party in the elections in 2012 at the height of the Greek crisis. This was a time when there was great fear that Greece's economy would crash out of the euro and Tsipras rose to fame because he lied to voters by telling them that he would tear up the country’s “barbarous” bailout agreement and impose a harsh “wealth” tax to fund the budget. Today he is taxing the poor as much as the wealthy and has not only signed a third bailout agreement, but his win has also strengthened all of the old PASOK forces (unions, etc.)

Only those who are blind (or have clear interests) refuse to see that his words were nothing but cr**p. Unfortunately the people of this country were fooled once again. 

(After all how else would PASOK continue to rule this country e?)

HellasFrappe had predicted -and warned all of you of this- this months ago, when it discovered Gianna Angelopoulou-Daskalakis' fondness for Alexis. We had presented her ties to George Papandreou and questioned her sudden support for Alexis. We have also presented Tsipras affiliation with the Brookings Institute -a think tank that had also become second home for good old GAP-. We all know that this institute is mostly funded by the Soros foundation so it was no surprise to us that Gianna got Alexis a prime seat at an event in New York on Sunday which is hosted by none other than the Clintons. The discussion, claim reports, is going to focus on boosting growth in Greece and southeastern Europe and will take place in the context of the annual conference of the Clinton Global Initiative, a venture of former US president Bill Clinton. Think about it. A self-proclaimed Marxist in the heart of global investment. It sounds like a joke!

So how can we rid ourselves of all these pseudo leaders and allow real statesmen to govern this country?  Well we need to once again become inspired as a society but in order to do so a natural born leader must rise that will prevail over partisan and personal agendas. He must be someone who will fully embrace the power of the head of this country and be the visionary that we all need.

After all, Tsipras was so terrible in his first round of government that today he is not running the country. Don't take my word for it, even the Guardian stated this several days ago. The British newspaper released an article where it mentions that the person who will be responsible for the governance of Greece is expected to be Maarten Verwey, a senior civil servant at the Dutch finance ministry who joined the commission in 2011 and led its Cyprus assistance program. His powers are unprecedented, Guardian says, adding that if Greek people have heard about his name, then they know that their vote will made a very small difference on September 20th to what happens next. Why is this happening? It is simple, Europe is prepared to keep Greece’s new leader in line so as to implement the reforms agreed.

Back to our dilemma, and beyond the given responsibilities of politicians and parties, Greece really needs to be governed with stability, consequence and coordination.  Is it Vangelis Meimarakis? Well, Meimarakis was good as a leader for the conservatives, but he is not a visionary and therefore cannot lead the nation he does not have leadership potential. 

(There is a fine line between leading a party, and leading a nation)

I personally bow my hat to him in unifying the ND party because at the start of the electoral campaign everyone thought he was the clear loser, however, as the polls closed he threatened to topple the mighty Tsipras from his throne. He also was successful in bringing something else to the forefront. Meimarakis proved that the center-right party is deeply rooted in society and is the only political force that has the ability to reform, in spite of its unfortunate feudal composition.

Some slam the conservatives for the decisions they made, but you have to give credit to ND for not falling apart like PASOK did (which today presents itself as SYRIZA, To Potami, Elia, and even PASOK). On the contrary, the conservatives found the strength to stand and convince all concerned that they are the only guarantors of Greece’s European course.

Why?

The answer is simple: Costas Karamanlis!

Why is Costas Karamanlis such a commodity, and how did this statesman keep ND together? Frappers, the answer is obvious, he has the ability to unite and not to divide, that is why.

But in order to get a better understanding of this exceptionalism, I decided to publish some excerpts from the first article that was published on this blog which more or less explains why there are scores of us who want him to rise again from the ashes and take hold of the conservative party and the nation.

Greece needs a natural-born leader, which is something that we do not have. As popular as Tsipras is for a minority of people he is not a visionary.

(Minority meaning that there was a 40percent absent vote at the recent national elections).

Leadership requires a climate of trust where people give you their wholehearted commitment and that is why this writer is, and will always be, committed to Karamanlis' vision.

Let me explain: There is an old school of thought that says the course of human history is charted by “great men:” Heads of church and state, generals and business magnates whose individual qualities of vision, courage, and charisma are so powerful that they shape the fate of nations and economies. Costas Karamanlis, former Greek prime minister (2004-2009) was one such leader.  His family is one of the two most powerful political dynasties in the country and his uncle, Constantine Karamanlis, is a towering figure of Modern Greek history. Constantine was prime minister from 1955 to 1963 and 1974 to 1980. Between the late 60s and early 1970s, he went into self-imposed exile in Paris after a military junta took power in Greece. He returned amid high drama to restore Greek democracy and established the New Democracy Party as a moderate umbrella organisation of right-of-centre groups.

While his uncle, a schoolmaster's son, was known to have an austere personality, Costas Karamanlis was depicted as a more easy-going, charismatic, affable figure, with a love of soccer.Educated in the US and Athens, Costas Karamanlis rose through the party ranks from his student days in the 1980s and emerged as the last-minute surprise winner during a leadership challenge following the conservative right-wing New Democracy party's 1996 election defeat and became Greece’s youngest political leader in history.

When he first rose to power some analysts criticized the move, but in the years as party leader, Costas Karamanlis secured a grip on his notoriously undisciplined party and provided the Greek Prime Minister Costas Simitis’ socialist party (that was in power at the time) with some of the toughest opposition they faced since the 1980s. Voters were immediately captivated by his clear sense of purpose, for he brought hope a renewed commitment, work ethics and impeccable VALUES back into to the political scene.

Aided by the unpopularity of the incumbent PASOK government led by Costas Simitis (a party that had been in power between 1981—1989 and from 1993—2004) and with charismatic Karamanlis at the wheel, the New Democracy party defeated the PASOK Socialists in the spring of 2004 just before the Olympic Games. He was re-elected in office in 2007. In 2009, and after losing to the socialists, he announced his resignation from the head of the conservative party. He was succeeded by Antonis Samaras. After he left office, many in Greece continued to blame him and the New Democracy party for economic difficulties, and till this day he continues to take blows from his opponents.

Why would so many turn their backs on such a great visionary you ask? Simple he was too great of a leader for a country so deeply rooted in corruption, that the very thought of an honest man was too good to be true... that is why.

I am deeply convinced that Karamanlis is a man that leads by example and that is what his opponents eventually used against him to weaken his popularity with us the people.Honesty and integrity were and still are the vital ingredients that signal him out from all other leaders before and after him, with an exception of course of his late uncle who was also a great leader.

Karamanlis had courage, let us not forget the veto his government imposed on FYROM’s (Skopje) accession to NATO. His stance on the Cyprus issue and his support of Papadopoulos' decision can only be characterized as patriotic.

His only sin was that he wanted to place Greece on the energy map, by allowing several pipelines to run through our boarders. These pipelines, as we all know, did not fit the purposes and/or interests of many western nations and by upsetting the scene he unwillingly created enemies for himself. He also expanded Greece's relations with Russia and this -as we all know today- upset the some of our allies so much that they even attempted to assassinate him.

Some claim that he looked for a reason to escape, leaving us to our fate. These same people forget that they tilted their support to George Papandreou and the Memorandums instead of listening to Karamanlis warnings in 2009. He was not intimidated by what our allies thought, and most importantly he never once thought of holding on to power, he only worked for the people.

In the course of history such personalities -or visionaries- are not well liked in the political fora. Take John F. Kennedy for example. He went against the system and became a victim by it. Karamanlis is one more such case.Successful or not in his government, liked, or not liked by his supporters and foes, no one can deny that he is the only most effective and profound leader that this country has today.

The reason we know this is because we know he was committed to worthwhile results and governed himself and the people of this country with those results in mind. It was this orientation that pushed him to be creative in solving problems, to subordinate their lesser motives and to persist in the face of obstacles and it was this commitment that eventually led to his downfall.

Till this day, his opponents still fear him, and have the audacity to criticise his decisions while in government. Even though evidence has surfaced that prove all of this to be untrue, they still attempt to discredit him. Some may ask, why so much criticism? The answer is simple dear Frappers: When he speaks he has greater public approval than that of almost all his predecessors and successors and that generates fear in his opponents who thirst for political power.

In fact he still has an almost worshipful attitude by many Greeks and this magic has largely to do with public desire for a heroic, inspiring leaders such as himself.

On a personal level, I admired him most for his sense of humour and his ability to speak directly to an audience. Karamanlis’ charisma and charm motivated many Greek people, such as me, who never had a sense of Greek politics, to be the best they could be for their country, and I personally thank him for this.

He has kept silent since his resignation as party leader, and I guess in some way it has given ammunition to his opponents to hit him even harder. Those who never stopped believing in him -or the Karamanlikoi supporters- know by instinct that this silence is his weapon to expose all his opponents, and in some way -the system-, that so unfairly hit at him for the past decade.

I also believe that in his last speech, just before the 2009 general elections, he indirectly warned us of the things to come... as well as left it to be understood that when push comes to shove that he will rise to the occasion again.

With so much chaos and uncertainty ailing our country, has that day arrived? This I cannot answer, but the only thing I can say is that Greece needs and thirsts for leaders such as himself. We need someone with a deep understanding of the country's problems, who has managed state affairs at the highest level and is in a position to converse abroad and to demand the respect of political leaders. Based on all of the above, only Costas Karamanlis can fit this role. Tsipras cannot. He has lost the respect of the international community. It is time to stop settling for less in this country because there is no room for mediocrities and indifferent non-political figures.

We need a man with a vision that works to resolve and heal the wounds of this obviously divided nation. (We saw this manifest at the recent referendum, slamming those who believed that the civil had ended in Greece.) A leader that honestly loves Greece and most importantly has the ability to give us the people some hope again.

Only Karamanlis can fill this role. It is his destiny.

So in the upcoming leadership convention, the conservatives, who have contributed greatly towards stabilizing democracy in this country, need to think long and hard and turn their backs on those seeking their five minutes of fame.

That is why I firmly believe that there can only be one visionary and this natural born leader's name is  Costas Karamanlis, everyone else is a pseudo version of Tsipras.

Tsipras' battles drachma lobby to avoid Grexit, and fights to achieve Greekment - Possible Scenarios

Today is one of the greatest moments in post-dictatorship modern history. Our government has to decide whether or not Greece will go bankrupt and avoid bankruptcy or fall off the cliff and die. As we witness the events unfold, we now finally know who the patriots are who support the will of the people -as well as Greek national interests-, and which groups have a plan to destroy everything we have come to know.

Here is where it really gets funny: All of those who for years suffered political and social criticism are now assisting the government from crumbling. The "German-tsoliades" (or German Greek traditional soldiers) are today giving Tsipras their vote, while his own deputies are playing it safe. These are the very same people who for years suffered brutal attacks on street corners, were insulted, mocked and at times even terrified to step out of their homes. All of this so that Greece does not wither and die; and yet Tsipras does not have the political courage to send all these wannabes to the Tartarus. This is indeed, another shameful page in the history of the Greek left. They are once again, placing the interests of their party over the will of the Greek nation.

At a time when this country’s finances are vulnerable, and the political climate is unstable, Tsipras has to pass legislation that he doesn’t even believe in to avert a Grexit and enter a new agreement with the Troika. His biggest challenge: Dealing with the Radical Left elements within his own party.

The first part of the deal involves passing several measures that are designed to help stabilize Greece and put an end to the prospect of a Grexit. Following this, a government reshuffle is sure to follow since a number of SYRIZA MPs have expressed their opposition to the last-ditch deal (namley Zoi Kostantopoulou, Yianis -with one 'n'- Varoufakis, Panagiotis Lafazanis, Dimitris Stratoulis and Kostas Isihos, etc.) Other SYRIZA MPs. Other MPs who expressed their disagreement have resigned include Foreign Affairs Minister Nikos Choundis, Alternate Finance Minister Nadia Valavani and the General Secretary of the Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Network Manos Manousakis.

In fact, dozens of MPs, including senior SYRIZA figures and the government's junior coalition partner, may partially or fully reject the bailout, forcing Tsipras to rely on the  opposition to carry the vote, which is expected a little after midnight on Wednesday.

With this in mind, Tsipras knows that he is quickly losing the 162 seat majority that he holds in the Greek Parliament so there are two scenarios at play at the moment: He will either return to the polls by creating a new government alliance, or he will step down and allow someone else from his party to take the reigns of Greece into their hands.

Protests have so far been relatively mild, but civil servants, pharmacists and protest marches by left wing anti-bailout groups (including extreme far left ANTARSYA and anarchist groups) which are planned for Wednesday night could turn violent.

And if that wasn't enough, 107 members of SYRIZA’s Central Committee, out of a total of 201, have signed a declaration expressing strong opposition to the bailout deal.

Those who will be voting for these measures have already denounced the agreement in advance, even Tsipras himself.

If this climate prevails, then our country will quickly reach another impasse and then, the Grexit will not just be a plan or the desires of some drachma or hard German circles, but a visible reality.

On Tuesday evening, and during a live interview to state broadcaster ERT, Tsipras said that he has the historic responsibility of safely leading Greece out of this current impasse, and an obligation to take all the necessary initiatives to implement this promise. We hope he makes good on his pledge, because the captain of a ship is not just a captain to his inner circle of friends, but of all the passengers on the ship.

Signed
HellasFrappe

The Drachma Lobby Has Its Man: Yianis (with one "n") Varoufakis

credit kourdistoportocali

For UPDATE please check end of present article

Beginning in 2001 and up until 2009 more than 300 billion euros were removed from Greek banks and transferred to foreign accounts while a further 200 billion was transferred over the last FIVE years. When one takes this into account then one can understand that the drachma lobby -which is rallying for Greece to remove itself from the Eurozone- is very powerful. Most of this money, as most of us already know, has been stolen from the Greek people either through the black market, kickbacks, blackmail, trafficking and other types of corruption. Now the owners of this huge sum of money are seeking a political leader that will allow them to increase these funds by 10-fold by forcing Greece to return to the drachma.

The idea that everything in Greece will be up for sale -at a top notch price- under the drachma is very attractive to the drachma lobby and they have been rubbing their hands with glee and anticipation in order to take advantage of all the state property that will be up for sale once Greece adopts its national currency once more, and a few devaluations have been made.

Most of the holders of these accounts -who are obviously some of the wealthiest families in Greece- had bet on the rise of SYRIZA, and its current leader to materialize their plan. They were actually convinced that with Tsipras at the Maximos Mansion, Greece would once again welcome the drachma in no time. Luckily it did not take long for Tsipras to realize what was at play and he turned his back on them and decided to keep Greece in the eurozone.

According to kourdistoportocali, these people are now focusing on Yianis (with one "n") Varoufakis who we all know loves to be in the spotlight, as well as is a primary example of their bourgeois lifestyle. From what we can see, Yianis (with one 'n') seems to be enjoying this role.

Keep this long intro in mind when reading the latest interview from our Yianis (with one 'n') Varoufakis which was published by the British New Statesman magazine on Monday. In an exclusive report, regarding his short five-month term as finance minister and the negotiations over the Greek debt in Europe, Varoufakis said that the Eurogroup is completely dominated by Germany. According to him, the Greek government was “set up” and he charged the defenders of European "democracy" of lacking from “democratic scruples".

In the interview, he obviously blames Greece's partners for "refusing to negotiate” while he stresses that the insistence on a "comprehensive agreement" was an indication of this unwillingness. In his opinion, Greece’s creditors delayed the negotiations and ultimately forced the government of Alexis Tsipras into a accepting “absolutely impossible, totally non-viable and toxic” proposals.

And here is where it gets juicy.

He confesses that he had a three-pronged plan for the negotiations, which included issuing IOUs, carrying out a haircut of the Greek bonds of 2012 held by the ECB (or announce the intention to do so) and taking control of the Bank of Greece. Varoufakis clarified that the IOUs would act as a transition to a NEW CURRENCY and then admitted that the idea of the IOU was restricted to a small number of government officials but was eventually shot down.

In the interview Varoufakis said that on July 5th, while crowds were celebrating the victory of the "NO" vote, six members of the government were invited to vote on a new project (parallel currency). According to him, only two voted in favor while four voted against, and because he was not able to convince Tsipras... his departure from the government was "inevitable". Before ending the interview, he left it to be understood that he had mapped out his plan to the government but did not find any support.

      "As the crowds were celebrating on Sunday night in Syntagma Square, Syriza’s six-strong inner cabinet held a critical vote. By four votes to two, Varoufakis failed to win support for his plan, and couldn’t convince Tsipras. He had wanted to enact his “triptych” of measures earlier in the week, when the ECB first forced Greek banks to shut. Sunday night was his final attempt. When he lost his departure was inevitable. That very night the government decided that the will of the people, this resounding ‘No’, should not be what energised the energetic approach [Varoufakis' plan]. Instead it should lead to major concessions to the other side: the meeting of the council of political leaders, with our Prime Minister accepting the premise that whatever happens, whatever the other side does, we will never respond in any way that challenges them. And essentially that means folding. … You cease to negotiate.”
     "Varoufakis’s resignation brought an end to a four-and-a-half year partnership with Tsipras, a man he met for the first time in late 2010. An aide to Tsipras had sought him out after his criticisms of George Papandreou’s government, which accepted the first Troika bailout in 2010.
     "He [Tsipras] wasn’t clear back then what his views were, on the drachma versus the euro, on the causes of the crises, and I had very, well shall I say, ‘set views’ on what was going on. A dialogue begun … I believe that I helped shape his views of what should be done.”
     "And yet Tsipras diverged from him at the last. He understands why. Varoufakis could not guarantee that a Grexit would work. After SYRIZA took power in January, a small team had, “in theory, on paper,” been thinking through how it might. But he said that, “I’m not sure we would manage it, because managing the collapse of a monetary union takes a great deal of expertise, and I’m not sure we have it here in Greece without the help of outsiders.”

Connection to Soros?

A post by the birdflu666 blog claims that Varoufakis has continually praised billionaire George Soros' proposals for solving the euro crisis in many of the interviews he had given abroad. According to the author, Varoufakis seems to completely ignore the fact that the billionaire hedge funder has a clear conflict of interest in solving the euro crisis in as far as Soros has had so many opportunities for becoming so very rich from it.

References

• http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2015/07/exclusive-yanis-varoufakis-opens-about-his-five-month-battle-save-greece
• http://kourdistoportocali.com/post/45453/varoufakis 
• https://birdflu666.wordpress.com/2015/01/29/does-soros-control-syriza-new-greek-finance-minister-looks-like-controlled-opposition/

UPDATE - George Soros, Jeff Sachs, Tsipras and Varoufakis

credit kourdistoportocali.com

It took the sharp eye of the kourdistoportocali.com team, and a talented photographer, to snap this photo (early June 2015) with Yanis (with one 'n') Varoufakis writing a note to a recipient named Robert Johnson with a message that involves billionaire George Soros, Jeff Sachs, Alexis Tsipras and himself.

Clearly Rob. Let's have this conversation.
The next day, George Soros asked to see Jeff Sachs to ask him to contact my Prime Minister and urge him to pull me away from the government since I am the obstacle to an agreement. Jeff also wanted to tell Alexis that it is his duty to accept any agreement, and to forget the (issue of) debt relief because Europe can not afford to have two open fronts, one in Greece and one in ... Ukraine.

This is what Yanis (with one "n") Varoufakis wrote, as seen in the picture above.

The author of this shocking article on kourdistoportocali notes that he wanted to expose this news because it is clear that Greece is in the center of a global conflict of interests (and at the center of an obvious attack on the Euro).

Reference: http://kourdistoportocali.com/post/45459/jeff-sachs

ANALYSIS - Greek Referendum Is More Con Than Democracy

The Greek parliament has approved a referendum to decide whether to accept the latest bailout terms offered by the country’s creditors. It will come too late and ask the wrong question.

This is a vote that Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras should have called at least a month ago -- if it were an honest effort to let the Greek people make a democratic choice on where their future lies, which it is not. As it is, the July 5 referendum will be so rushed as to be flawed in principle, and will come after the current bailout program expires. Indeed, it may come after Greece has already suffered a banking collapse.

The referendum is not, as Tsipras repeatedly claimed during his announcement, an expression of democracy in response to the “authoritarianism” of the creditors. His argument that the creditors must bend to the will of his election mandate has been preposterous from the start: In which debtor nation would voters not elect to have easier credit terms? And in what case has the International Monetary Fund or any creditor been answerable to the electorate of its client nation?

I’ve argued for Greece to hold a vote to clarify what its people want. It was necessary because Syriza lied during the campaign to get its representatives elected in January, by offering to end the bailout terms, keep the bailout and stay in the euro -- an option that, rightly or wrongly, was never available. Rather than produce a clearer mandate, though, this proposed referendum would continue Syriza’s subterfuge.

According to a draft cabinet proposal, the question on which Greeks would be asked to vote in just seven days’ time would be whether they want to accept the latest offer from the country’s creditors. This is a complex document that has yet to be translated into Greek and may well be void by Wednesday. It is clear from the language Tsipras used in describing that offer -- “blackmail,” “humiliation,” “ultimatum” -- which way he wants the vote to go.

Again, just as during the election campaign, Syriza officials are not mentioning what all this would mean for Greece’s place in the euro. They are maintaining the fiction that the question of accepting the bailout terms is quite separate from whether Greece defaults on its debt payments, sees its financial sector collapse and is forced to issue its own currency in one guise or another.

Not once in his address on the referendum did Tsipras mention the common currency. When the Associated Press asked Syriza cabinet minister Panagiotis Lafazanis whether the nirvana of reconstruction and progress he described as following from a “no” vote to the bailout would involve leaving the euro, he said: “It is you [the media] who pose this dilemma.”

This is populist dishonesty. It may be that by this point Greece would be better off defaulting and returning to the drachma (though I doubt it). And it may be that a majority of Greeks would make the choice to go it alone, rather than continue a dysfunctional relationship with the nation’s economic partners and creditors (although opinion polls suggest not). But the proposed referendum doesn’t ask those questions.

Tsipras and his party want this vote to legitimize their decision to default and exit the euro, most likely after that decision has already been made, without actually telling Greeks that this is the choice they are making. It gives further weight to my suspicion that Syriza’s erratic negotiating behavior for the last five months has been driven by a preference for default and exiting the euro they could not express, because the party had no mandate for it.

Greek voters should be told the honest truth about what they would be deciding on July 5, if the vote goes ahead at all after the likely chaos of the next week: a return to the bailout terms within the euro, or a default and a return to fiscal sovereignty outside it.

Read the whole story by By Marc Champion: Bloomberg View via ekathimerini

OPINION: Fear not Greece, there are always good Germans with whom you can empathise - LOL

By John Ward (The Slog) -  The Financial Times writes that Sigmar Gabriel, Germany’s vice-chancellor and head of the country’s Social Democratic party — long seen as a more conciliatory political group — penned an article for Monday’s daily Bild newspaper in which he warned patience towards Greece in Germany was running thin. In a global exclusive, The Slog obtained permission to put into words what Herr Gabriel meant to write:

     ‘We in the SPD think it is time to put the shot across your bowels, SYRIZA. Our patience is wearing thin with your time-wasting, infantile suggestions for compromise. Time and time again and over and over we Germans have tried to be honest with you but you insist on negotiating about the non-negotiable.
     Our own tragically disabled Herr Schäuble spent many long and painful hours explaining to you very slowly because you are Greek and stupid that your plans for recovery could never work as well as ours were doing before you used the brazen distraction of an election to poke your nose into things that do not concern you and the understanding of which are way beyond your crypto-communist ideology that burnt the Reichstag down in 1933 and forced unser geliebter Fuhrer to declare a State of Emergency against his better democratic judgement.
     It is clear to us that your claimed destiny of bowing to our every wish was not promised in good faith, because here we are nine weeks into a process in which we Eurogermans have never once wavered from our promise to stick to the rule of no compromises, but you destructive Soviet partisans continue to introduce suggestions. How many times do we have to tell you that suggestions are strengstens vervoten and disobeying the rules of give and take in in this discussion into which we on our side have entered to take back that which you took so greedily having been given the chance to borrow far more than you could every repay and then took the piss as if it was your God-given right to take what you were given, I mean what could be clearer than that Gott in Himmel?
     German workers may have social democratic leanings like me, but they are nevertheless able to see their national duty to defend the Vaterland, and that is why the National Socialism in their genes shouts nein, nein and again nein in the face of string-vested layabouts who can’t even count to ten and insist on whining about the debt being nothing to do with them which was our point in the first place all of this is none of your business, you should have left it to experts like Herren Veryzealous and Smarmarse now there were men who knew how to say yes.
     Your game-playing baldie Janice Varofuckov – see, even his name is Russian – makes fun of our glorious German workers who are already in penury and on the verge of selling their children just to be ready for the dreadful cost of your despicable decision inside our eurozone to shit rather than go outside to take a dump to default well let me tell you goatherding nonentities that the clue is in the name, because default is all yours and just when we were starting to turn the corner you rabble stabbed us in the back and so now their patience is wearing thin with the help of Bild in whose hallowed pages I have chosen to make this final eleventh hour last chance five to midnight last minute appeal for you to come to your senses and capitulate.
     I send this reasonable request in all humility and recognition of you as a member State in the European Union and in recognition of the many friends I have made in Greece while waiting several hours for service in your quaint tavernas.
     Most sincerely
     Your avenging Angel Gabriel x’

EDITORIAL: Follow-up meeting between Tsipras & Juncker - Delay in Payment? - Early Elections

European Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas on Thursday confirmed that there will be a follow-up meeting between Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in the coming days. The spokesman said he was unable to confirm a precise date for the next meeting between Tsipras and Juncker but did confirm that it would be held. He indicated that the participants in the next meeting would likely be the same as in the meeting on Wednesday night.

He also noted that many of the various leaks concerning the contents of the proposal to Greece from the institutions belonged in the sphere of rumor. Schinas said that one needed to look at the overall picture and the essential issues, which were none other than certain gaps that remain and must be bridged through negotiations.

Juncker remains in constant communication with all the political officials involved in the negotiation in order to find a solution, he added. Eurozone sources, in statements after the Tsipras-Juncker meeting, said they were optimistic that a staff level agreement between Greece and the institutions "was just days away".

What the creditors propose

According to press reports, the proposal that was presented to Tsipras includes a number of “difficult” measures, such as the introduction of two VAT rates and simultaneous abolition of exemptions and discounts currently in place. Specifically, European sources argue that the VAT reform is key, at it believed that it will increase revenue on a permanent basis. According to this plan, there would be two rates; a low 11% and a higher 23%. The low rate would apply to medicine, books and food, while all other products and services will incur a 23% tax.

Furthermore, the creditors demand cuts worth 1.8 billion euros (1% of the Greek GDP) from the pension system. The creditors have also revised the primary surplus targets for Greece, with a 1% GDP goal for 2015, 2% in 2016, 3% in 2017 and 3.5% in 2018. Although these revised targets are significantly less than previously (3% in 2015 and 4.5% in 2016), they are still higher than what Athens had initially expected.

No debt relief

The Financial Times revealed that the proposal does not make any reference to any sort of debt relief. The IMF seems to doubt the Greek government’s ability to achieve these ambitious fiscal targets and is pressuring the Europeans to agree upon a restructure of the debt. The European Commission, however, disagrees with the IMF and as such, there is no such provision in the draft agreement.

Tsipras: Imposition of recessionary measures is unacceptable

Following his talks with Juncker and Eurogroup President Jeroen Dijsselbloem on Wednesday, Tsipras commented that the imposition of recessionary measures is unacceptable. He said that the Greek side submitted a “realistic and constructive proposal” and that the European Commission appeared to be willing to come to a realistic solution. Tsipras ruled out any recessionary measures, such as abolishing the social solidarity pension benefit (the so-called “EKAS”) or increasing the VAT on electricity.

Varoufakis says that solution will be found by end of June

Meanwhile, and while speaking to Parapolitika radio on Thursday, Finance Minister Yianis Varoufakis said that a solution will be found "before the end of the month." He added that as the negotiating process comes to an end, creditors adopt a stricter stance. When referring to the agreement, he spoke of a "complicated negotiation, beset by the creditors' internal disagreement, which will end on June 30," and added that "the creditors' internal disagreement is the only issue, otherwise the discussions are made in good and positive climate."  He also categorically ruled out the possibility of introducing a single 23% VAT rate, when asked by journalists.

Ahead of the interview, and while being pressed by journalists outside the Ministry of Finance, Varoufakis refused to respond to the criticism he received from  SYRIZA central committee member Yannis Milios, regarding his comments on accepting 70% of the bailout.

Delay in payments

Some reports claim that Milios has been very critical of Varoufakis, over his statement that 70% of the existing bailout program is acceptable, asserting that had this particular statement been made prior to the elections, SYRIZA would have come third. Milios, who delivered a speech at a conference in Thessaloniki earlier this week, said that Greece is going to have to pay 3.5 billion euros to the European Central Bank on June 22nd, and left it to be understood that this might be a problem. This is probably why he proposed a payment delay, claiming that the verbal assurances of receiving some funds, provided Greece first signs up to any agreement, are not enough. Milios said that a compromise, (where everything remains the same and everyone is meant to be happy because there will no immediate wage and pension cuts), is unacceptable.

Quite surprisingly he also said that the bank account deposit outflow could have been restricted, if a limit on daily cash withdrawals from ATMs had been introduced. He argued that a 300-euro limit, that covered the needs of 95% of Greeks, would be enough.

“Early elections are inevitable”

The news has not sat well with the radical left wing of the SYRIZA party. Vice President of Parliament Alexis Mitropoulos commented that early elections appear to be inevitable, following the meeting between Tsipras and Juncker. He told SKAI channel that the government basically has two choices, either it continues with deadlocked negotiations, or ask the people what to do. He made it clear that the dilemma is not the “euro or the drachma”, since that would be “a tragedy”, but that such a proposal will not be approved by SYRIZA’s Parliamentary Group. This is why he estimated that Tsipras will not propose it himself in Parliament.

He was not alone. SYRIZA’s parliamentary spokesperson Nikos Filis also told MEGA Channel that early elections are inevitable, should the creditors present Greece with an ultimatum. He said that if the government is pressured into signing an ultimatum, "it is clear that we will not sign it and ask the people to express their opinion”.

Earlier, he had argued that the government must prioritize wages and pensions over loan payments.

Likewise, SYRIZA MP Rachel Makri appeared on ANT1, where she openly supported the proposal made by Yannis Milios, to delay payments towards the International Monetary Fund. Makri underlined that Greek citizens "come first” and added that “if the extortion continues, there are other options” and that “the obligations we have towards the people are education, health care, pensions and wages”.

Hardouvelis mail was better, says Voutsis

When asked to comment on the agreement proposal that was presented to Tsipras, Minister of Interior Nikos Voutsis estimated that the “the Hardouvelis email was much less painful and ND leader Antonis Samaras did not bring it to Parliament”. Speaking on SKAI he said that he was optimistic arguing that the agreement proposal, which includes measures voted in by New Democracy, was an unacceptable starting point for the negotiations.

He too did not rule out the possibility of early elections and noted that they would be a democratic initiative to strengthen the mandate for a realistic agreement, rather than a rupture with Greece’s partners. According to him the differences between both sides are difficult to bridge.

SYRIZA set for problems with "internal opposition"

And if that wasn't enough, SYRIZA's Left Platform, otherwise known as its own ‘internal opposition’, issued a statement on iskra.gr, where it argued that the delays employed by the creditors aim to put the Greek economy in a choke hold. The article also disputes the intention of the creditors to actually reach an agreement with Greece.

Our opinion

Obviously the government is weighing the political cost of these measures because we do not want to believe that they are incapable of understanding the fatal consequences of a rupture with Europe. SYRIZA's largest voting pool is the Greek public sector and in our opinion it has won another victory because the proposal does not appear to include any redundancies, while the creditors also seem to have backed down on the deregulation of collective dismissals. The plan does, however require that the government commit to not abolishing any of the recent legislation regarding the job market.

So is this what they were negotiating all these months? Redundancies in the public sector? Again to the privileged few?

One of the Greek Left's greatest political achievements was passing off public sector reforms as "anti-populist" measures. Let us be clear, we are not referring to reforms that deal with wage and pension cuts, or any type of austerity measures (because we are against any more taxes) but we are rather referring to competency and excessive spending in the public sector.

(And because HellasFrappe does not like to generalize we are specifically referring to the elimination of public sector "benefits", a reduction in the number of civil servants, are in favor of a freeze on wage hikes and we are definitely in favor of less expenses in the public sector on the overall.). 

Why would a small portion of this society (because the radical left is a very small percentage) be so schizophrenic to reforms? The answer is simple. There is no such thing as popular or unpopular measures, there are only reforms that benefit a section of society while the rest suffer. Those who are presently screaming at the top of their lungs to maintain the current status quo, and who are against any type of reforms, are the same group of people that have benefited from the state for decades now.

(Obviously we are referring to the majority of public servants, unionists and oligarchs of this country. And we are once again not referring to austerity measures but a clear clean-up of the public sector.)

Clearly when civil servants scream out for higher wages, or when private companies who worked with the public sector advocate for them, they are not talking about salary hikes that should be given to them because of their competency or productiveness, because that is indeed laughable, but they are clearly demanding benefits because they are only concentrated on their own pockets!

The unions are the other instrument that help them on this. They do nothing for the general working population and always work solely for civil workers. Have you ever seen them stage a protest for the 1.5 million Greeks who are currently unemployed in the private sector? Have you ever seen them bat an eye over the hundreds of thousands of family owned businesses that have closed over the past few years?

NO.

Yet when a decision is taken to fire or fine a civil servant for being incompetent and/or unproductive, or for whatever other reason, even major television channels advocate for him (or her) and slam the government that is ruling for being against the "will of the people".

(Oh brother!)

It is an age old battle and has been for eons in Greece (as it probably is all over the world). The privileged and the underprivileged. The great paradox, however, is that today those who the majority of Greeks regard as "privileged" are asking for even more!

Why do we say privileged: We say privileged because of their excessive salaries which have suffered little over the last few years. Those who scream out that their salaries were reduced are overstating things because the truth is that only their benefits were cut off, their wages more or less remained intact. Another reason why we say "privileged" is on account of their jobs; they don't have to worry about their performance, or about taking a sick leave, they will always have work, they are permanent workers! This is far from what is happening in the private sector where workers are struggling to find some sort of employment, to receive their hard earned wages which have been backed off for months, and who are always being weighed on their performance and competency. Let us not even touch on the subject of unemployed persons over the age of 35 -especially woman- because the numbers are staggering.

Never once do the privileged think about the other half because they really do not care.

We recently witnessed this in DEH (The Greek Power Company). They voted on wage and benefit hikes never once taking into consideration that this bill would be footed by all the Greek people. As of Wednesday night, and if this austerity measure passes, we will again be slammed with an even further hike on our electricity bills since our creditors want it to rise.

How much more can we pay? And for what?

These are the real problems that have brought Greece to its knees. A lack of actually evaluating performance has led to a public sector that acts more of a state within a state and is difficult to maintain economically. Yet this has not convinced the radical left that the only solution to this problem is to finally get rid of these privileges and this division in society.

Yes there are numbers involved, but reforms such as the above have nothing to do with austerity and yet these reforms were negotiated between the present government and our creditors? If this is true, then it is pitiful.

Why can't operate like every other Western society? Take Canada for instance. Opening a registered company takes less than a day and only costs $50 CAD. It creates jobs, gives people opportunities. Why do we need so many people stamping document after document in the public sector when computers were invented to make their jobs easier? Because computers collect data, and the state within the state will not be able to do as they please with public finances as well as with us the people (through the popular fakelaki).

Does the Left advocate for balance in society or not? Then they should put their money where their mouths are!

The reality, which some choose to ignore, is that Greece has been cut off from every source of funding, (yes privately owned companies, and little shops need money flows and funding to pay their workers). At present our economy is on a constant down turn, unemployment has not dropped and the black market is flourishing with young and foreign workers because they are willing to work for peanuts. People are that desperate!

Yet the public sector does not bat an eye to all this... It is always about their benefits and their privileges. What is worse, there are so many politicians who purposely ignore these realities and insist on playing Russian Roulette with the rest of us because they are afraid of their political fans.

ENOUGH

We agree on the idea of general elections, even though there are many conservatives that do not.

This drama must finally come to an end. It is high time that everyone rose up to the circumstances and lived up to their duties. Tsipras can be a great leader, but he must rid himself of his radical left platform.

Referneces: ANA-MPA, enikos, protothema, To Vima, ekathimerini, ANT1, SKAI, Defencenet

Mistakes and Shame

Mistakes and Shame

On May 9th, we commemorated the 70th anniversary of the victory against Nazi Germany. History will remember this date as one on which what we call “the West” and which in reality is only the circle of European allies of the United States, has committed a major political mistake. In this mistake, the responsibility of President François Hollande is significant, and could have profound consequences. It’s not only a mistake, it’s a shame, and a damning one! The following article was given to HellasFrappe to publish. It was written by by Jacques Sapir (and translated by Anne-Marie de Grazia) and first featured at russeurope.hypotheses.org

Putin isolated ?

Under the pressure of the United States, a majority of European countries renounced sending a President or a Prime Minister to Moscow to attend the great parade commemorating Victory. But, and this is extremely important, China, India and numerous countries of Latin America made the trip as well as some European leaders like the Czech President or the Greek one. If we measure the demographic weight of these representatives, they make up over 50% of the World population. If one measures their economic weight, it is high, too, around 40%. To speak under these conditions of an “isolation” of Vladimir Putin is an absurdity.

But the political symbolism is even more important. The chiefs of State or chiefs of governments of the « BRICS » countries and of the countries of the Organisation of Security and Cooperation went to Moscow. The presence of the Chinese and of the Indians acquires an even greater, more particular significance. The population of China paid an extremely heavy tribute to a conflict which, for China, started not in 1939, but in 1937. In fact, it is – behind the USSR – the country which has suffered the most. The atrocities committed by the Japanese army were abominable. Indian troops fought against Germany and Italy as well as against Japan. The participation of contingents of the Chinese and Indian armies to the parade in Moscow reaches, from all evidence, beyond mere commemoration.

It was clear therefore that this 9th of May would assume particular importance. Because of the attitude of the United States, but also because of the cowardice, not to use a more injurious term, of the European leaders, this 9th of May 2015 has confirmed that the world is split in two. It has symbolized the opposition of an “old world” of the Atlantic Basin to this new world emerging around Asia which is constantly attracting new countries. One can only, in this regard, take due notice of the Chinese or Sino-Russian initiatives [1], of the Asiatic Bank of Investment in Infrastructures [2] (BAII/AIIB), all the way to the project of a Eurasian Union, which are constantly taking on importance. These initiatives could have been conceived in a frame of openness to the “old world.” It is the responsibility of the United States, but also of those who out of a herd instinct or out of fear have followed in their footsteps, to have provoked the symbolic rupture between these two worlds, which has been verified with the parade of May 9th.

The responsibility of François Hollande.

Traditionally, it is France who seeks to re-establish dialog and which strives, because it has a universalist conception of certain principles, to bring down prejudices and to reduce hostilities between blocks. General de Gaulle pronounced many speeches against the « blocks-politics, » of which the one at Phnom Penh, in 1967, remains the most famous. By deciding, in the last minute, to send Laurent Fabius, our Minister of Foreign Affairs, not only did François Hollande commit a heavy mistake, but he discredited himself durably on the international scene. Sending the Minister of Foreign Affairs clearly sends an undignified message of “neither-nor.” If one wanted to be present in Moscow, the President should have made the trip, or his Prime Minister (Manuel Valls) who, we must remember, according to the Constitution, « leads the politics of the country. » But François Hollande preferred to take in the sun in the Caribbean and Manuel Valls to engage in disgraceful polemics against Emmanuel Todd. History will remember this desertion, both physical and moral, of the two most important authorities in our country and the disgrace they inflicted not just to Russia but to France too.

But most serious is the fact that if, in the future, France should be – justifiably – troubled by this resurgence of “blocks-politics,” it will no longer have any legitimacy to speak up against it. François Mitterrand, who had a sense of History and of formula, used the expression «the little telegraph boy » to denounce the visit of Valery Giscard d’Estaing to Moscow at the beginning (1979) of the war against Afghanistan. But today, at a moment when it would have been important to be in Moscow, be it only to bear witness through his presence of the unity of the world and to enter into conversation with these leaders of the “new world,” the French President preferred to play the absentee subscriber. His absence is an abdication and a damning shame.

The consequences.

This abdication will doubtlessly have profound and durable consequences at least as long as the current political personnel will be in power. One forgets, or feigns to ignore that, within the government and the political class in Russia, Vladimir Putin is one of the most pro-Western [3]. In one sense, he took due notice of the principles of international politics which were the basis of international relations since the 1980s, at the moment when they were being increasingly abandoned by the United States and their allies.

The question of the principles and rules, which must command over international relations is at the heart of the problematic defended by Vladimir Putin since the speech he pronounced in Munich in 2007[4]. He came back to this theme several times, particularly in 2012[5]. This latter declaration is particularly important because it predates the Ukrainian crisis. One of the points broached by Putin is the following: « The recent series of armed conflicts started under the pretext of humanitarian aims is undermining the time-honoured principle of state sovereignty, creating a moral and legal void in the practice of international relations. It is often said that human rights override state sovereignty. This is undoubtedly true – crimes against humanity must be punished by the International Court. However, when state sovereignty is too easily violated in the name of this provision, when human rights are protected from abroad and on a selective basis, and when the same rights of a population are trampled underfoot in the process of such “protection,” including the most basic and sacred right – the right to one’s life – these actions cannot be considered a noble mission but rather outright demagogy. » [6] .

This question was already in the air in 2007, when Vladimir Putin had called for a clarification of the rules of International Law. Since 2003, from the American intervention in Iraq, it became obvious that a tendency to interpret rules to their sole profit was driving the policies of the United-States[7]. We know that this drift of American policy towards ever more « interventionism » has only reinforced itself.

Similarly, in 2012, he expressed the following reflections as to the will of the United States to build themselves up into an invulnerable bastion: « By definition, absolute invulnerability for one country would in theory require absolute vulnerability for all others. This is something that cannot be accepted. » [8]. We see here the responsibility of the American policies in the progressive stiffening of the Russian position. The incapacity of the United States to admit that the XXI century will not be the American century is pregnant with conflict.

Multipolarity or unipolarity of the world.

The attitude of the United States, and of the countries which follow them or which they constrain into following them is in the process of welding together an alliance of the new world against the old one. This was not the initial project of Vladimir Putin who, in his 2007 speech, was talking about a multipolar world. The reconstruction of Russia did not imply a direct confrontation with the United States [9]. Russia, for all that it sought to free international institutions from the American grasp, did not want to monopolize them for itself. [10]. At the conference of Munich in 2007, we find this declaration of Vladimir Putin : “I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world. And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today’s – and precisely in today’s – world, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.”

Not enough attention has been given to what Vladimir Putin said. Yet, he drove home the message again shortly after in the same speech: “We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations.” [12].

He was not alone among Russian leaders to hold such a discourse. In an article published both in the Russian press and the Financial Times the then Minister of Finances, Alexis Kudrin, declared:  « It is not difficult to understand that if one of these structures [Kudrin is referring here to the IMF as well as to the World Bank] is perceived by a significant part of the world as insuring the domination of one country or of one group of countries, it will lose its legitimacy. It will cease to be an efficient instrument »[13].

This passage shows the Russian position articulating two elements which were distinct but linked. The first is a doubt about the capacities of one country (here he clearly means the United States) to assemble all the means required in order to exert its hegemony in an efficient way. It is an argument of realism. Even the most powerful and the richest country in the world cannot insure alone the stability of the world. The American project exceeds American strength. This is an observation against which little can be said. But there is a second argument which is no less important and which is situated at the level of the principles of Law. There exist no norms on which to found unipolarity.

In his book of 2002, Evguenni Primakov, who was Prime Minister of Russia in 1998 and 1999, and who remains one of the great connoisseurs of international politics, said just that[14]. Not that the various countries are not able to define common interests, or even that there exist common values. Putin’s speech is by no means “relativistic.” He only assesses that these values (the “moral and ethical basis”) cannot be the foundation of unipolarity, because the exercise of power, political or economic, cannot be defined in terms of values but must also be defined according to interests. This is tantamount to refuting the thesis of a de-politisation of international relations which, in the mind of those who promote it, is to become reduced to Human Rights and to the “laws” of economy. If international relations are not technical (the mere operating of common norms) but political (the management of different and potentially conflicting interests) including in economic relations, then any aspiration to hegemony becomes immoral.

In praise of Gaullian politics. 

One understands then that it is important to break this new dynamic of “blocks-policy” in order to revert to the dynamics of a multipolar world, and this is what the Russian government was expecting from France. But we are forced to take act of the fact that the French government and its Prime Minister have failed on this point, as on many another. Beyond the shame and anger inspired to us by the attitude of François Hollande and of Manuel Valls, beyond the disgust we feel at the insult not only to the Russian people but to those of China and India, and to all those who have come to Moscow on May 9th, we must observe coldly that either by calculation or out of cowardice, the French leaders, by abdicating their natural role, contribute to precipitate the world into a future made of wars and conflicts. Their responsibility in having given up Gaullian politics at the moment when they were required, shows their congenital incapacity and will remain in History. It’s a mistake and – as we have known since Talleyrand – mistakes in politics are worse than crimes.

We should remember the poem The Scythians, written by Alexander Blok in 1918. His words still resound today with an eery force. Did he not write then: « Comrades! We shall be brothers!/ But if you refuse, – we have nothing to lose./ And we can be perfidious, too.  For centuries you will be cursed/By generations of sick children! /Everywhere we shall withdraw/ into the thickness of our forests. And to seductive Europe,/We shall show our Asiatic grin. »

The Scythians

You are millions. We are hordes and hordes and hordes.
Try and take us on!
Yes, Scythians – we! Yes, Asians – we!
With slanted, greedy eyes!

To you – the centuries, to us – but an hour.
We, like obedient slaves,
Held up a shield between two enemy races –
The Mongols and Europe!

For centuries and centuries your old furnace raged
And drowned out the roar of avalanches,
And Lisbon and Messina’s fall
To you was but a monstrous tale!

For hundreds of years you gazed at the East,
Storing up and melting down our jewels,
And, jeering, you merely counted the days
Until you could point at us your guns!

The time is come. Trouble beats its wings –
And every day our grudges grow,
And the day will come when every trace
Of your Paestums may vanish!

O, old world! While you still survive,
While you still suffer your sweet torture,
Come to a halt, sage as Oedipus,
Before the ancient riddle of the Sphinx!

Russia is the Sphinx. Rejoicing, grieving,
And drenched in black blood,
It gazes, gazes, gazes at you,
With hatred and with love!

It has been centuries since you’ve loved
As our blood still loves!
You have forgotten that the world holds love
To burn and to destroy!

We love everything – the fire of cold maths,
The inspiration of divine vision,
We understand everything – sharp Gallic thinking
And gloomy Teutonic genius…

We remember everything – the hell of Parisian streets,
And Venetian chills,
The distant aroma of lemon groves
And the smoke towers of Cologne…

We love the flesh – its flavor and its color,
The stifling, mortal scent of flesh…
Will you blame us, if your bones crack
Under our strong and tender paws?
 …
Come to us! Out of the horrors of war,
Come into our peaceful arms!
While there is still time – sheathe the old sword,
Comrades! We shall be brothers!

But if you will not – we have nothing to lose,
And we can be perfidious, too!
For centuries and centuries you will be cursed
By generations of sick children!

Everywhere into our woods and thickets
We shall withdraw! And to seductive Europe
We shall show our Asiatic grins…

Translators: Tatiana Tulchinsky, Andrew Wachtel, and Gwenan Wilbur

Notes

• [1] Garibov K., « La Russie a adhéré officiellement au pool de réserves monétaires des BRICS », text posted on SPUTNIK 27 April 2015, http://fr.sputniknews.com/opinion/20150427/1015850582.html
• [2] http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2015/04/17/20002-20150417ARTFIG00363-cette-banque-chinoise-qui-veut-concurrencer-la-banque-mondiale.php
• [3] See discussion between Fyodor Lyukanov and Max Fisher published on http://valdaiclub.com/usa/77200.html
• [4] A complete and faithful translation of this speech can be found in the review La lettre Sentinel, n° 43-44, January-February 2007, pp. 24-29
• [5] Vladimir Putin on foreign policy: Russia and the changing world, declaration published in http://valdaiclub.com/politics/39300.html
• [6] Idem, page 2. [7] J. Sapir, “Endiguer l’isolationnisme interventionniste providentialiste américain” in La Revue Internationale et Stratégique, n°51, autumn 2003, pp. 37-44
• [8] Vladimir Putin on foreign policy: Russia and the changing world, declaration published in http://valdaiclub.com/politics/39300.html, p.2, « By definition, absolute invulnerability for one country would in theory require absolute vulnerability for all others. This is something that cannot be accepted. »
• [9] Sapir J., “ Russie : retour gagnant ” in La Revue pour l’intelligence du monde, n°7, March-April 2007, pp. 28-38.
• [10] A. Kudrin, « Bretton Woods Redux », in Moscow Times, 2 October 2007 (tribune also published in The Financial Times).
• [11] See the review La lettre Sentinel, n° 43-44, January-February 2007, pp. 25.
• [12] La lettre Sentinel, n° 43-44, p. 25 and ssq.
• [13] A. Kudrin, op.cit..
• [14] E. Primakov, Le monde après le 11 septembre et la guerre en Irak, Presses de la renaissance, Paris, 2003, Mir Posle 11 sentjabrja, Mysl,., pp. 138-151.

GEOPOLITICS: Russia Turkey and the New Greek Sirtaki

According to geopolitical analyst F. William Engdahl, the European Union has an uncanny knack for shooting itself in the foot. He claims that under strong pressure from a Russo-phobic Washington administration and various Russo-phobic EU governments, Brussels decided to take steps in 2014 to block the bilateral agreements between Russia’s state Gazprom and EU countries such as Greece and Bulgaria to buy gas from a new Russian pipeline that was to have been called South Stream, the southern counterpart to the Gazprom-Germany North Stream line.

F. William Engdahl (NEO) - For the neoconservatives in the Obama State Department and Pentagon, that would have forged far too strong EU-Russia economic ties that would significantly weaken America’s ability to blackmail the EU. The EU Commission is brazenly violating all legal precepts by trying to enforce, retroactively, new laws that they claim Gazprom has violated. Further they forced the weak government of Bulgaria last year to back out of their Gazprom contract.

Washington’s Russo-phobes were gloating as they fantasized about getting a nuclear deal with Russia’s ally Iran that could woo Teheran to double-cross Moscow and sell Iranian gas from South Pars, the world’s largest gas field, via another pipeline through to Iran’s city of Bazargan at the border with Turkey where it would transit Turkey on to Greece and Italy.

Unlike the failed US Nabucco gas project which lacked gas, the Persian Pipeline, were Iran to be foolish enough to let Washington control it, would have gas, lots of it to weaken Russia’s hold on EU gas markets that were previously supplied via Gazprom via older Ukraine pipelines.

Putin calls EU bluff

As we noted at the time last December, Russian President Vladimir Putin caught the EU by surprise when he announced cancellation of the South Stream Gazprom EU project during a visit in Turkey with President Erdogan. There Putin proposed instead an alternative that would pipe Russia’s gas through Turkey to the door of EU member Greece. There different EU states could “take it or leave it.” The advantage for Gazprom and Russia is that they would not be responsible for construction of the needed EU pipelines.

When he announced the decision, he stated bluntly, “If Europe doesn’t want to realize this, then it means it won’t be realized. We will redirect the flow of our energy resources to other regions of the world. We couldn’t get necessary permissions from Bulgaria, so we cannot continue with the project. We can’t make all the investment just to be stopped at the Bulgarian border. Of course, this is the choice of our friends in Europe.” South Stream would have provided secure delivery to southern EU countries including Bulgaria, Hungary, Austria, Italy, Croatia and also Serbia. It would avoid the current transit pipelines running through Ukraine.

Now less than six months later Russia and Turkey have completed the landmark deal to begin deliveries of Gazprom Russian gas via a new “Turkish Stream” pipeline into and across Turkey through a pipeline now in construction. Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller announced on May 7 that, “An agreement has been made on the beginning of exploitation and deliveries of [Russian] gas along the Turkish Stream in December 2016.” The statement came following Miller’s meeting earlier in the day with Turkish Energy and Natural Resources Minister Taner Yıldız. The new pipeline will travel through Turkey to a gas hub on the Turkish-Greek border for further distribution to European customers.

A geopolitical cherry on top

And only minutes after the successful Russia-Turkish agreement, Putin, reported to be a master chess player, made a master geopolitical chess move into the European Union disaster that is called the Eurozone.

Greek news outlet, Capital.gr, reported that the very same day Miller’s Turkey Gazprom deal was finalized, Putin had an apparently very cordial phone chat with Greek Prime Minister, Alexis Tsipras. After the talk, Putin’s office released a statement that Putin had told Tsipras that Russia would be willing to extend money to Greece in return for Greek participation in the Turkish Stream project into the EU. The Kremlin statement said, “In that context, the Russian side confirmed its willingness to consider the issue of extending financing to state and private companies that will cooperate in the project.”

    In Tsipras’ April 8 meeting with Putin Russia denied it had made a deal on energy; that all changed on May 7 after Turkey finalized Turkish Stream

After Tsipras’ talks with Putin in Moscow on April 8, the Kremlin spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, issued a denial of Der Spiegel reports that the two had come to an agreement in which Moscow would advance the cash-desperate Greek government with an immediate €5 billion cash advance from Russia based on expected future profits linked to the pipeline. The Greek energy minister said at the time that Athens would repay Moscow after 2019, when the pipeline is expected to start operating.

That was on April 8. Flash forward to May 7 and the finalization of the Russia-Turkish Stream deal, and it seems now that there is also a Russia-Greece deal to advance Athens the sizeable cash sum, just before Athens must come up with large sums to repay IMF and EU loans in order to get more senseless EU and ECB “support.” The difference was clearly the finalization of the Turkish Stream. Now EU bureaucrats in Brussels have new gas pains as Putin puts a Greek cherry atop Moscow’s Turkish geopolitical deal on gas.

If the Russia cash advance to Tsipras comes to pass, not only will Athens be able to dance a Sirtaki. This time it will be a dance in which the role of Zorba is played by a Russian, Vladimir Putin, not the Mexican, Anthony Quinn.

Wolfgang Schaüble, Angela Merkel, EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker all will have three options. They can decide to stand on the sidelines and clap to the sensuous rhythms of the new Sirtaki. They can join in the dance by refusing Washington blackmail on renewing EU economic sanctions against Russia. Or they can go on to boycott the dance and sink deeper into a new crisis of the Euro.

The ongoing panic selloff in German bond markets over recent days suggests it might be wise for the Berlin government to consider an entire new choreography for its European Grand Strategy. The old Atlantic NATO dance is rapidly becoming a Danse Macabre for Germany and for Europe. Putin’s Sirtaki would be far more fun for Europe and the world.

The author, F. William Engdahl, is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

EDITORIAL: Greeks did not vote for uncertainty Mr. Tsipras, but rather for stability!

Time is ticking and more and people are starting to realize that the "change" that they wanted and voted for on January 25th has instead given way to much more uncertainty and insecurity. Negotiations with Greece's creditors are never ending, red lines fade only to reappear,  the recession is suddenly returning, the economy is frozen, consumption is clearly retreating, more private sector jobs are being lost, investments are being abandoned, activities are on the decline and tourism may be on the rise but with the surge of illegal immigration into our country this too will soon be under threat. While the government is straining every available resource to pay wages and pensions, the majority of the public that works in the private sector, and which has been the most affected by this six-year recession is either not being paid, and if they are receiving any money at all it is months later seeing that there is no liquidity on the market. In addition to this, our national issues are in the air, we have upset both the east and the west, anarchists are destroying public infrastructure and causing havoc all over the country, our borders are being compromised because the government believes in open borders, our education system is being set back at least 30 years by being politicized and the public sector is returning to a system that we all condemned. Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras knows this, but he also knows that he cannot delay with reforms much longer because our nation is literally one inch from completely crashing.

When the SYRIZA-ANEL government rose to power on January 25th, HellasFrappe had published a special report noting that it would limit its criticism of the new government until negotiations with our creditors ended, but there is a limit to everything. When we made this statement we had also stressed that any decision/action that was taken by the present government which was positive for Greece would be applauded by us (and we proved this with many of the articles that have been posted on this blog). Nonetheless, we also warned that if we felt that Greece was heading towards total destruction we would immediately ignore the honeymoon and grace period and begin stating our opinion!

Time is up; and we are up to here with all this insecurity and uncertainty.

Here are some areas that are deeply concerning to us.

ECONOMY

The new government has wasted almost three months in endless negotiations with Greece's creditors, following all its anti-memorandum rhetoric. In our opinion, its decision to extend the negotiations for two and a half months caused a resurgence of insecurity, and has more or less wiped away what trust had been built by the previous government of Antonis Samaras.

Let us make it clear, we are not claiming that the conservative government did a better job at managing this country's finances, but certainly no one can deny that the (international economic) mood was starting to change under ND's rule and things were starting to stabilize once again.

In other areas, the vice grip on liquidity has tightened, the funding gap was revealed and all remaining resources had to be pooled in the State's account at the Bank of Greece, in order to pay the loan payments to avoid another possible disorderly default that would in no doubt have caused catastrophic consequences for our nation.

In the real economy things are not only completely in the air but they have worsened to dangerous levels. Aside from a lack of funding from the banks, Greece now has a suspension of financial decisions from taxpayers, households, investors and businesses.

Why?

Simple, because many of those who voted for the new government, also voted for their past do not pay rhetoric.

And if that wasn't enough, some financial newspapers are even speaking of a new recession which they claim began in the first three months of this year and is now expected to cripple the last bits of the economy that withstood the long six year recession which the previous government was painfully getting us out of.

Only a handful of MPs in the government know exactly what is going on because they have finally come in tune with REALITY, but there are still too many forces in SYRIZA whose mental state forces science to lift its hands in the air.

SYRIZA may have won the elections with promises of a recovery, of tearing up the memorandums and blah blah, blah... but haven't they realized that this cannot happen? What will it take for these people to wake up and smell the coffee?

Today Greece only has a couple of days to come to an agreement or basically die.

Alexis Tsipras is obliged to do everything in his power to save the country from total destruction and forget about impressing a few members in his party who are clearly clueless of what the best interests of Greece actually are.

POLITICAL INSTABILITY

It is entertaining to watch various ministers in this Leftist government make proclamations one day which are then recalled by the senior administration the very same day! At the same time it is also quite pitiful because these officials insist on playing games of self-assertion, while ignoring the consequences of their words. They forget that Tsipras did not win the elections simply because he won the progressive vote, but because he also received quite a bit of support from many conservatives as well. It is almost like milking a stone for water, getting the extreme left-wing of SYRIZA to understand this is almost impossible. All of this of course is beginning to take affect public opinion. Indeed, the SYRIZA-ANEL party is still leading over the main opposition New Democracy party, but with all this uncertainty the general mood will give way to dire repercussions sooner or later.

Over the past few months, we have witnessed ministers and institutional officers stating whatever they think benefits their political clientele, even though their decisions come into direct conflict with the interests of Greece. Some metaphorically threatened our creditors that we would export jihadists all over Europe, others said they believed that it was compatible to not pay our creditors (or one or two installments), and others are busying themselves with a mechanism on how to not pay the burdensome debt.

If it was that simple... Then wouldn't have this already have happened? Is this the image that Greece really wants to give the world?

It is our opinion here at HellasFrappe that some ministers in this government have not yet understood that they are not in the opposition anymore (where they stated whatever they wanted without consequence). The confusion does not only exist in their public appearance but also in the government’s negotiation tactics and it’s day-to-day management tactics, which is also raising a few eyebrows as well. For instance, we find it totally absurd for a Minister to state in the morning that he is 400 million euros short to pay wages and pensions, only to listen to a statement by the same minister two hours later claiming that he retracted his statement and the money was found. Is this just mere naivety and inexperience? It could probably be, but it is also very destabilising and we hope they understand that the Greek people cannot bear anymore wise and cheap talk. If you are going to make an official statement, make sure that all your facts are straight from the beginning!

DOMESTIC FRONT

On the domestic front, anarchists freely vandalize the walls outside parliament, invade the Polytechnic and spread chaos in the area of Exarchia. Everywhere these hooligans go they threaten and burn public property without ever taking into consideration that these damages will be later paid by the majority of Greek taxpayers. Leftists feel so overwhelmed by their beliefs, that they feel that they have to destroy buildings, concrete, marble statues, set fire to private property, etc to get their point across. Excuse us... But what ever happened to COMMUNICATION?

Luckily for us we live in an era that freely allows us to communicate to anyone and everyone in numerous ways. Why do they feel that they need to destroy public property to do so?

Then there is the issue of our police forces. Their powers have been limited since SYRIZA came to power and from what we know are now forced to observe from a distance, and only act on orders (as with most officers,) but we all know these orders never come. Neither Greece’s major problems, nor the social problems that emerge on a daily basis can wait for the new SYRIZA-ANEL government to mature and assume its responsibilities.

EDUCATION

Ah yes education. Once more this institution is falling prey to political and partisan expediencies. Before the latest law for the universities could be tested out in practice, SYRIZA's new Minister of Education decided to knock it down, and totally change the university entry system. Without dialogue, basic coordination or debate, he devised a new set of reforms that does not seek solutions and improvements, but a return to the past.

In simple terms, University Councils are being abolished, students will vote for Rectors, the academic asylum is changing again and the “eternal students” are once again making their comeback. Three decades or so after unionism was introduced in higher education, which established a state of populism and transaction that belittles the operation of the universities, this country is literally returning to the same model all thanks to a (Stalinistic) stance on modern education.

Instead of finding ways to improve our education system by closely examining how top institutions operate abroad, we are quite laughably returning to an old world of operation which we here at HellasFrappe feel undermines the education process itself. We are not alone, aside from the students who object to this, and their parents, tens of hundreds of academics from all over Greece and abroad have already requested for the Councils and new management to not be abolished, until their operation can be assessed but SYRIZA's Education Minister ignored all this and decided to adopt the opinions of a section of the union bodies of students and administrative staff.

At a time when everyone knows - and given the situation the country is in - that the greatest investment Greece can make is in its production capacity, knowledge and education, this new government is overturning any attempt to rationalize education. It is ignoring THREE DECADES of experience in the operation and management of universities and restoring a problematic model, in order to serve political consideration.

And we ask: Is this the way to move forward?

CONCLUSION

Frappers, these were just some of our concerns. There are so many more that deal with foreign relations and geopolitical issues but we are going to produce a separate report on that over the next few days.

All we want is for this cheap rhetoric to end. With Greece literally on the brink of total destruction, Tsipras who we feel can make a great leader needs to ignore the buffoons in his party, put some order to their endless parade of statements and bring back some stability to this country.

Did he or did he not promise us the Greek people a better and more efficient government?  If yes then he has to first end this war of statements and impressions – which we all know are primarily intended for domestic consumption – . Greece's salvation is paramount. There is no more time for delays and sensationalism. Decisions have to be made that will balance the general interest of the country and the people.

We had warned everyone about this before the elections. As it would seem, the Greek people had to experience SYRIZA’s reality in order to understand the gravity and complexity of Greece’s financial and political problems. It is time for logic understanding and low tones to prevail.

There cannot be a more recession-causing policy for the Greek economy than extending today’s uncertainty… Everything else is about fairy tales for gullible fans, who will be fewer and far between as time goes on. To overturn the situation the SYRIZA-ANEL government must finally assume its responsibilities towards the country and the people. There is no other way.

Signed
HellasFrappe

GEOPOLITICS: Bosnia was a magnet for foreign mujahedeen, but now it exports them! (VIDEO)

credit youtube

According to this geopolitical analyst, Bosnia was once a magnet for foreign jihadists during its 1990s war, while today the nation is more or less grappling with the threat from home-grown extremists wooed by the conflicts in Iraq and Syria.

by Rusmir Smajilhodzic (RIMSE) - While most Bosnian Muslims are moderates, a few thousand have adopted the ultraconservative Salafist brand of Sunni Islam introduced by the fighters who flocked to Bosnia from North Africa, the Middle East and Asia during the 1992-1995 conflict between Serbs, Muslims and Croats.

Most of those foreign fighters, or "mujahedeen", left Bosnia when the war ended.

But the seed had already been sown. Twenty years on, the radical preachers giving fiery sermons in "mesdzids", or improvised prayer halls, are no longer foreigners.

Those taking up arms are also local men.

On Monday, a gunman shouting "Allahu Akbar" ("God is greatest" in Arabic) opened fire on a police station in the eastern town of Zvornik, killing one officer and wounding two others before being killed in a shootout.

The assailant, identified as 24-year-old Nerdin Ibric from a village near the northeastern town of Zvornik, was suspected of links to radical Islamist groups. Another man, said to have travelled to Syria, was arrested Tuesday over the attack.

Suspected Islamist extremists had made their presence felt before in the Balkan country.

In October 2011, a gunman opened fire on the US embassy in Sarajevo, wounding a policeman before being injured himself and arrested.

In June of the previous year, a man set off an explosive device at a police station in the central town of Bugojno, killing one officer and wounding six others in what the government called a "terrorist act".

Prayer room recruitment

Would-be jihadists are suspected of being recruited by radical preachers, operating through a network of informal prayer rooms.

     "There is no doubt that the recruitment process is possible due to the existence of a network of such places of worship," Esad Hecimovic, a local journalist who has reported extensively on the subject told AFP.

Hardliners, whose numbers are estimated by the authorities at around 3,000 followers, represent just a fraction of Bosnian Muslims, who make up around 40 per cent of the population of 3.8 million.

But their ranks are suspecting of supplying scores of fighters to the wars in the Middle East.

Terrorism spreading

Reacting to the attack on the police station in Zvornik Security Minister Dragan Mektic warned terrorism had become "a serious problem".

     "We need to use all our capacity to stop this terrorism that has been spreading in Bosnia," he said.
     "Either we defeat terrorism or it will defeat us."

Some 150 Bosnians are believed to have joined jihadists groups in Iraq and Syria, while some 50 others have already been and returned from the battlefield, according to the intelligence services.

Two men arrested at Sarajevo airport in February were charged with attempting to join the Islamic State group, which has sown terror throughout the Middle East and North Africa and executed several Western hostages.

     "Those who return to the country are very dangerous. They are of course under surveillance but the danger is that they start to recruit others," said Jasmin Ahic, a professor at the Sarajevo University Faculty of Criminology.

Stiff sentences

To prevent their departure, parliament last year introduced sentences of up to 20 years in prison for jihadists and their recruiters.

In January, a radical imam in the northwestern town of Buzim was the first person to go on trial accused of recruiting people for jihad.

Husein Bosnic, a former member of a mujahedeen unit in Bosnia's war, replaced Nusret Imamovic as leader of the country's Salafists after Imamovic left for Syria in late 2013, according to intelligence sources and the US State Department.

Imamovic, who is named on a US State Department terrorist list, is believed to be the third-in-command of Al-Qaeda's Syria affiliate Al-Nusra Front.

Testifying at Bosnic's trial in Sarajevo, the relatives of several youths who travelled to Syria or Iraq, some of whom have died in fighting, said their kin attended his sermons.

The prosecution accused the cleric of receiving "significant" funding from unnamed backers in Arab states.

Bosnia's Balkans neighbours Albania, Serbia and Kosovo have also swooped on jihadist networks in recent weeks.

Fifteen men went on trial in Serbia and Albania in March accused of recruiting and financing volunteers for the war in Syria.

     "For the first time in the region, people who call on others, in a very sophisticated way, to go to foreign battlefields and commit crimes, are being tried," Ahic said.
     "What will come out of these trials has yet to be seen."